Don't Miss


Home   >   Opinion - Analysis   >   Knowledge Sharing   >   Harvard Study Confirms Fluoride Lowers IQ

Harvard Study Confirms Fluoride Lowers IQ

By on August 4, 2012

Flouride is the main ingredient in most toothpaste

If the scientific link between fluoride exposure and a noted decreased in IQ is a conspiracy theory, then perhaps the Harvard researchers who just confirmed such a link should be tarred and feathered by the ‘evidence-based’ medical media. In a telling review of a variety of studies that have demonstrated just how significantly fluoride can damage the brain and subsequently your IQ, Harvard University scientists stated “our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children’s neurodevelopment.”

The most outstanding component to the study is where it was published. Authors published their conclusion online in the July 20th edition of the prominent journal Environmental Health Perspectives, afederal government medical journal stemming from the United States National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. The very same government that has continually asserted that water fluoridation is both perfectly safe and ‘effective’ at aiding the health of citizens who consume it on a daily basis.

In the past, the US government has actually been forced to call for lower fluoridation levels as previous research had also drawn a link between fluoride exposure and a host of neurotoxic effects. In the latest research by Harvard, it is made even more explicitly clear just how toxic fluoride can be to the body. In a written statement, researchers state:

“The children in high fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ than those who lived in low fluoride areas.”

Fluoride Lowers IQ, Sparks Tumor Growth

This should come as no surprise to those who have followed fluoride research over the past several years. As far back as 1977, for instance, epidemiological studies performed by the head of the Cytochemistry Section at the National Cancer Institute Dr. Dean Burk revealed that fluoride exposure led to increased tumor growth – even at levels as low as 1 ppm (the standard for United States drinking water). Beyond revealing an accelerated tumor growth rate of 25% in his research, fluoride was found to produce melanotic tumors, transform normal cells into cancer cells and increases the carcinogenesis of other chemicals.

In 1977, Dr. Burk estimated that fluoridation has actually caused about 10,000 deaths according to his research.

It will come as no surprise, then, that even the EPA — an agency charged with protecting the people — has classified fluoride as a substance with ”with substantial evidence ofdevelopmental neurotoxicity.” Perhaps the EPA is also run by blubbering conspiracy theorists. In another entry by study authors, it is explained how fluoride actually attacks the brain in unborn children and essentially launches a direct assault on their neurological development:

”Fluoride readily crosses the placenta. Fluoride exposure to the developing brain, which is much more susceptible to injury caused by toxicants than is the mature brain, may possibly lead to damage of a permanent nature.”

But will the United States government answer to the study? As mentioned, many studies have exposed the same correlation of IQ-crushing fluoride intake. Paul Connett, Ph.D. and director of the Fluoride Action Network was one of the many activists to speak out regarding the last study to highlight the association. At the time, there were 23 former studies on the matter, and Connett felt that this 24th study was by far the strongest. And what was done? Unfortunately, it was brushed under the rug by mainstream health organizations who continue to assert that fluoride is perfectly safe. Some even recommend supplementing with fluoride pills.

In regards to the last breaking study, Connett stated:

“In this study we found a significant dose-response relation between fluoride level in serum and children’s IQ…This is the 24th study that has found this association, but this study is stronger than the rest.”

Will the latest Harvard-backed study be ignored by major public health organizations, or will serious change be initiated?